This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author proski
Recipients brett.cannon, eric.araujo, proski, r.david.murray, terry.reedy
Date 2015-10-09.21:15:04
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1444425304.87.0.251623763065.issue25303@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
That's what I have now:

check:
        $(PYTHON) -m py_compile $(SOURCES)
        rm -f $(addsuffix c, $(SOURCES))

make check
python -m py_compile redacted-build redacted-git-diff redacted-git-gc redacted-git-status redacted-init redacted-server
redactedbuilder.py
rm -f redacted-buildc redacted-git-diffc redacted-git-gcc redacted-git-statusc redacted-initc redacted-serverc redactedb
uilder.pyc

That's what David is suggesting:

check:
        for file in $(SOURCES); do \
            python -c "compile(open('$$file').read(), '', 'exec')" || exit 1; \
        done

make check
for file in redacted-build redacted-git-diff redacted-git-gc redacted-git-status redacted-init redacted-server redactedb
uilder.py; do \
            python -c "compile(open('$file').read(), '', 'exec')" || exit 1; \
        done

That's what I could have if I live long enough to see Python 3.6 on my development machine.

check:
        $(PYTHON) -m py_compile --no-output $(SOURCES)

make check
python -m py_compile --no-output redacted-build redacted-git-diff redacted-git-gc redacted-git-status redacted-init redacted-server
redactedbuilder.py

If that does not seem like an important improvement, then I can live with what I have.
History
Date User Action Args
2015-10-09 21:15:04proskisetrecipients: + proski, brett.cannon, terry.reedy, eric.araujo, r.david.murray
2015-10-09 21:15:04proskisetmessageid: <1444425304.87.0.251623763065.issue25303@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2015-10-09 21:15:04proskilinkissue25303 messages
2015-10-09 21:15:04proskicreate